Azamat, (01)
Ingvar and I were talking about the difference between science
and philosophy. Ontology is something that one could study
in science (discovering what exists) or in philosophy
characterizing what exists) or in both. (02)
Those more detailed comments you suggested are questionable.
Trying to assign one or another to one field or the other is
almost impossible, since people working in many different fields
have studied, analyzed, or contributed to all of those aspects.
I think it's a waste of time even to try. (03)
In any case, I do not believe that a sharp distinction between
science and philosophy is possible or desirable. My recommendation
(which many philosophers, such as Peter Hacker, have discussed in
more detail) is to use the criterion of the proportion of attention
to conceptual analysis to characterize some efforts as more
philosophical vs. more scientific. But there have been philosophers
who made good contributions to science and scientists who have made
good contributions to philosophy. (04)
I think it would be pointless and counterproductive to try to
pigeon-hole the contributions by making too many fine distinctions. (05)
John (06)
_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (07)
|